current gen systems are already outdated even before they were released... i remember 500$ X360 running circles around a 500$ PC. just look at TLOU on the PS3.. now it's the exact opposite with 400$ PC running around current gen consoles.. and their "exclusives"
That still looks great for the hardware that is pushing it. The Cell was and still is a beast. Just a total pain to program for. If Sony had opted for a 2 core PPU and 14 SPE's developers might have committed suicide. But if harnessed properly, the results would be great for sure. But instead we get weak azz Jaguar cores that can barely touch a Core2 Duo in real world calculations. Thanks Sony and Microsoft for gimping the systems even more by providing garbage CPU's with mid to low end GPU's. Baffles this phreek for sure.
That still looks great for the hardware that is pushing it. The Cell was and still is a beast. Just a total pain to program for. If Sony had opted for a 2 core PPU and 14 SPE's developers might have committed suicide. But if harnessed properly, the results would be great for sure. But instead we get weak azz Jaguar cores that can barely touch a Core2 Duo in real world calculations. Thanks Sony and Microsoft for gimping the systems even more by providing garbage CPU's with mid to low end GPU's. Baffles this phreek for sure.
People never doubted the power of the cell the problem with the cell processor is that it was difficult to program for. Hence why games that were developed for both the PS3 and 360, the 360 version was the one to get. I could see the cell making a comeback in about 10 years when processors need to evolve.
Interesting. What was used to get these numbers? Looks like the PS4 CPU is slower than the PS3. I have a very hard time believing that unless they used benchmarks in which the Cell is traditionally strong in.
Interesting. What was used to get these numbers? Looks like the PS4 CPU is slower than the PS3. I have a very hard time believing that unless they used benchmarks in which the Cell is traditionally strong in.
CELL's SPU workloads are transferred to AMD GCN's ACE units and PS4 has 8 ACE units with each ACE unit has 8 queues.
I don't understand why people are praising the last gen versions of this game. Not only does it look visually worse all around, it has half the framerate and only 720p res.
@blackace: I keep trying to move away from my PS3, but too many game for $10 or less in the PS Store keep me there. I just got Ratchet and Clank: Enter the Nexus which came with R & C Quest for Booty, From Dust, and Might and Magic Clash of Heroes all for $15; and RE4 HD the other day for $7.80. Too much to pass up, wish I had a bigger hard drive. :P
I have a crapload of PS3 games I still need to play, I played my PS4 like crazy in it's first month - but my PS3 has drawn me back in to play it a little (plus I wanted to run through MGSIV before MGS V).
I'm basically sworn off adding any more PS3 games to my backlog (even those cheap-o flash sale type games). But I have such a large backlog that it will probably be at least another year before I completely "move on" from PS3.I will probably keep going back and forth in spurts between my PS3 and PS4.
I had a smaller backlog on my 360, so I decided to move on there (and actually I took advantage of one of those trade-in deals) which I used to get my PS4).
Oh yes, downsampled screenshots show exactly what the game looks like.
I have the PS3 version of Ground Zeroes and it actually looks like complete ass. 720p and 15-30 FPS, with poor texture quality and flat lighting everywhere, not to mention horrible aliasing. But I should commend Kojima Productions for at least getting MGSV running on last-gen consoles, I guess.
And in any case, this is not a testament to the "power" of the PS3; it's a testament to how great the Fox Engine is, and how skilled Kojima Productions are
Interesting. What was used to get these numbers? Looks like the PS4 CPU is slower than the PS3. I have a very hard time believing that unless they used benchmarks in which the Cell is traditionally strong in.
activision released these numbers last year. GPGPU compute is what sony is pushing for to make up for the weak cpu..uncharted demo so far is the best use of this on consoles
the PS3 was a badly designed console and will always be so. it was so bad that its designer was promoted sideways (is he even still there?) and sony went with a completely different setup for the PS4.
the cell was an evolutionary dead end and sony should have canned it as soon as they became aware of unified shaders in GPUs.
thankfully sony learned after that screw up: the PS4, and the philosophy behind its design, is far superior and is the correct approach.
Dr. Khanna is due another 220 consoles, though the physicist may move onto PC graphics cards due to the former's low amounts of memory. PC graphics cards, on the other hand, are also low cost, extremely powerful, and each one is equivalent to 20 PS3s in terms of performance.
PC graphics cards handles scientific research just fine.
@Gue1: relax guy, they are only similar because its a cross gen game. if it was an exclusive ps4 game developed SPECIFICALLY for ps4 and only ps4 it would look even better than it already does.
According to the announcement of Fixstars reached the Cell processor of the Playstation a performance of 29 FPS, that is 1.2 times real-time conversion - the cell has a similar performance as the CUDA Badaboom encoder in combination with an Nvidia Geforce GTX-285. By comparison, Intel's current top-CPU, the Core i7 965 XE, does it still at 18 FPS - normal desktop CPUs even create only about 5 FPS.
According to the announcement of Fixstars reached the Cell processor of the Playstation a performance of 29 FPS, that is 1.2 times real-time conversion - the cell has a similar performance as the CUDA Badaboom encoder in combination with an Nvidia Geforce GTX-285. By comparison, Intel's current top-CPU, the Core i7 965 XE, does it still at 18 FPS - normal desktop CPUs even create only about 5 FPS.
Hahahahaaha
Here's Digitalfoundry's take on the encoder, not surprisingly the view is fairly negative.
That said, the speed is the key here, and make no mistake, CodecSys CE-10 can be stupendously fast. In my tests I found I could encode 720p at 35-40FPS, while 1080p came in at around 20-24FPS. That isn't exactly real-time, but it's still very, very fast. But speed counts for nothing in the greater scheme of things, if the quality of the encode you get out of the other end isn't particularly good. The freeware x264 encoder can pump out 1080p at a sustained 24FPS using just one core of a 3.0GHz Core 2 Duo if you turn off enough encoding features. Speed is important, but the whole point of h264 is that quality is king.
Your "CUDA Badaboom" example is obsolete since recent GPUs has video encoding hardware enhancements.
The ATI Avivo Video Converter can do everything that Badaboom can do and even more. The Avivo Video Converter can encode full HD 1080p content and works with MPEG-2 for BD and DVDs. Very impressive for a free utility that will be part of the Catalyst 8.12 drivers.
...
One person we talked with said PowerDirector 7 can transcode 20 movies at a time, so that will be interesting to see. When you consider that the Radeon HD 4870 has 800 stream processors transcoding that many movies at once it doesn’t sound too bad at all. Once more of these mainstream applications are out we will see how performance is between AMD and NVIDIA. I guess stream computing is finally going to become mainstream! Right now the killer application for stream computing is Adobe Creative Suite 4, but as you can tell, many more programs we all know and love are making the jump to the GPU.
Legit Bottom Line: AMD has been hard at work on GPGPU applications for over two years now and has finally branded the work as ATI Stream Technology.
This game doesn't look brilliant on last gen consoles. It's not impressive considering there are other open world games that look as good, if not, better.
I think PS3 would have performed much better had they gone for a more conventional CPU. Cell was an overhyped and overly complex piece of hardware that, seemingly, only a select few devs could properly utilize.
In that sense the PS4 is a much better console and Sony really learned from their mistakes (I am indeed implying that the Cell was a mistake and I'm sure Sony would agree).
That said, the speed is the key here, and make no mistake, CodecSys CE-10 can be stupendously fast. In my tests I found I could encode 720p at 35-40FPS, while 1080p came in at around 20-24FPS. That isn't exactly real-time, but it's still very, very fast. But speed counts for nothing in the greater scheme of things, if the quality of the encode you get out of the other end isn't particularly good. The freeware x264 encoder can pump out 1080p at a sustained 24FPS using just one core of a 3.0GHz Core 2 Duo if you turn off enough encoding features. Speed is important, but the whole point of h264 is that quality is king.
Your "CUDA Badaboom" example is obsolete since recent GPUs has video encoding hardware enhancements.
The fact that you have to bring a ATI GPU to beat Cell make cell look even better,what DF did was hide on quality because Cell actually owned i7 rig they freaking built in speed a 2k PC..hahahaa
My Cuda badaboom example is not obsolete because recent GPU are out now because on 2006 they were not you idiot,recent GPU mean shit Cell is a CPU that was ready on 2005 10 years ago...lol
But is always fun seeing you go running and hiding on GPU vs Cell instead of downplay it you actually make the argument for cell stronger,it was so good that it had to pit against GPU...
That said, the speed is the key here, and make no mistake, CodecSys CE-10 can be stupendously fast. In my tests I found I could encode 720p at 35-40FPS, while 1080p came in at around 20-24FPS. That isn't exactly real-time, but it's still very, very fast. But speed counts for nothing in the greater scheme of things, if the quality of the encode you get out of the other end isn't particularly good. The freeware x264 encoder can pump out 1080p at a sustained 24FPS using just one core of a 3.0GHz Core 2 Duo if you turn off enough encoding features. Speed is important, but the whole point of h264 is that quality is king.
Your "CUDA Badaboom" example is obsolete since recent GPUs has video encoding hardware enhancements.
The fact that you have to bring a ATI GPU to beat Cell make cell look even better,what DF did was hide on quality because Cell actually owned i7 rig they freaking built in speed a 2k PC..hahahaa
My Cuda badaboom example is not obsolete because recent GPU are out now because on 2006 they were not you idiot,recent GPU mean shit Cell is a CPU that was ready on 2005 10 years ago...lol
But is always fun seeing you go running and hiding on GPU vs Cell instead of downplay it you actually make the argument for cell stronger,it was so good that it had to pit against GPU...
Also you are anal about cell...
Wrong, the quality was made similar you stupid cow
PS3's cell could've been much bigger than analysts narrowing it down to "a unicorn". In fact, it was realized once you played Killzone 2 or look at games like UC3 (the sand dunes)
Do they look the same cause the ps4 uses the cel.......oh wait it doesn't......But sheens I though the cell with its untapped potential and being the most advanced cpu ever it would be used in the ps4, and so many other electronics....yet its not used in anything now....
Do they look the same cause the ps4 uses the cel.......oh wait it doesn't......But sheens I though the cell with its untapped potential and being the most advanced cpu ever it would be used in the ps4, and so many other electronics....yet its not used in anything now....
You're forgetting about NASA and the US Military, they use PS3's instead of super computers.
Log in to comment